Euthanasia today can be described as a physician or others ‘killing’ of a suffering patient in attempt to accelerate death and relieve pain. In the game of life and death: life is the most obvious answer one would think. However, this is not always the case. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is an extremely controversial topic of today. It has the minds of society wondering if death solves some of the most extreme medical problems.
It is understandable, though tragic, that some patients in extreme duress, such as those suffering from a terminal, painful, debilitating illness may come to decide that death is preferable to life. People debate that pain felt by terminally ill people can be controlled to bearable levels through proper management. They conclude that there is no need for physician-assisted suicide. However, many people in North America do not have access to adequate pain
Euthanasia weakens the trust relationship between the doctor and the patient. We expect doctors to heal and save lives, not to kill. I feel that I should be able to trust my doctor to do what is best for me as an individual in any situation, including ending unbearable suffering, even if it is my choice to die in order to end my suffering. Doctors may lose the trust of their patients by not helping them to end their suffering. 3.
Euthanasia Leaves no Room for Hope and Miracles Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is a topic involving many serious issues that continue to be argued over among people throughout the world. There are two types of Euthanasia. One is active euthanasia, a doctor taking any direct action designed to kill the suffering patient. The other is passive euthanasia, to withhold treatment and allow a patient to die. In most cases, passive euthanasia is permitted but whether or not active euthanasia should be allowed creates a major controversy.
They think that they have nothing else to live for, but it is just a stage that they are going through. There are certain factors that are dangerous and lead people to end their lives. There are people that want euthanasia to be legalized but they do not understand the consequences that come with that legalization. Once euthanasia is legalized vulnerable patients could be talked into suicide and doctors could take that decision for them. Euthanasia should not be an easy way out to get rid of a patient’s pain.
This causes a lack of trust in doctors. The oath was created so patients could be reassured that doctors only wanted to help them, not hurt them (Kumar, 2010). Also, those who have terminal illnesses still sometimes have a chance of living. With the great advances of technology and medicine, there is often a possibility, and they’ll never know if they decide to just end their life. Furthermore, physician assisted suicide would hurt the patients’ family and friends, as the only person who has to give consent is the ill one.
Issues include suicide, passive euthanasia, active euthanasia, hospice care, and physician assisted suicide. Advanced directives are also very important when talking about the right-to-die, because without them people force family to make the tough end of life decisions, which could cause disagreements within the family. The right-to-die is defined as expressing or advocating for the right to refuse extraordinary measures intended to prolong someone’s life when they are terminally ill or comatose. Generally people who use right-to-die laws do not do it because of the pain or financial reasons, but because they are worried about becoming a burden, or losing their autonomy. If a person exercises their right-to-die they already have their wills or property sorted out, but if that is not the case there are many places to help people sort out their wishes as well as property.
Terminally ill individuals must have a disease that is without cure and has a future laced with mental and physical degradation. This degradation could severely impact how an individual lives their life but does not necessarily mean he or she should be a candidate for euthanasia. The patient may be scared of what the future holds, but they need to have time to become accustomed to their new life. To ensure that the patient is truly dissatisfied with life, this is where the evaluation by a psychiatrist comes into play. If a patient is examined by a psychiatrist to determine their true will, we can eliminate pressures by family or societal pressures that could influence a patient to feel guilty for posing a burden on other people.
While euthanasia is illegal in the United States, it is still in practice in many other countries. In this paper I will argue that it is morally wrong for someone to kill a person, even it is on medical terms. Health professionals should aim to improve health and suffering, not kill because providing care becomes overbearing. Many people go into the medical profession in order to help people and improve their daily living. If doctors and nurses are enabling people to terminate their lives simply because they are suffering, it means that these professionals aren’t doing their job correctly.
The controversy surrounding euthanasia Through many years debates on euthanasia have been controversial since there are many perspectives to achieve this topic. Public policy, Healthcare and Religious opinions take an active voice on the debate. Euthanasia is known as "the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. "(Euthanasia.com) Certainly this kind of definition is subjective since it depends on the source or the person you ask. In the 1994 edition of the British Medical Journal Anne Rodway states that to talk about euthanasia precise definitions are needed.